X-Authentication-Warning: millenium.texas.net: jimi owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 12 Nov 1996 09:11:36 -0600 (CST) From: "C.A. Piepenbring" To: Kaehno cc: operlist@the-project.org Subject: Implementing Users' Wishes (was Re: Tally So far) Sender: owner-operlist@lists.primenet.com X-Status: On Mon, 11 Nov 1996, Kaehno wrote: > 3.) Stop trying to make this network the way the users want it? Hell > no. You can forget that. My priority is to help users. When > it can be shown unequivocably that this is _bad_ for the users > and network, and not your politcial dogma, I will reliquinsh > that idea and find another. Until then, get off my back for > defending what the users think and want. > I think Kaehno has the perfect plan here. In fact, this mail so inspired me last night that I went out and created my own web page to determine what users of the Electronic Frontier Foundation IRC network want. After a "/msg $*.net,$*.org,$.com,$*.edu,$*.ca,$*.no,$*.se,$*.my Please vote on http://www.texas.net/~jimi/users.html for how you want EFFnet implemented" I received over 8,000 web page hits in 2.5 hours. My web page (since removed because of the huge amount of traffic it caused to the Texas Netwroking web server) was even more in-depth than Kaehno's, but I think it gives a much broader, across-the-board picture of what the users truly want. The results are summarized below: 1) Should we implement a rock solid method of preventing users from "hacking ops", even if it means that you cannot hack ops back on your own channel should it be taken over. Yes - 6,438 No - 1,773 2) Should we implement a channel service that allows the first person to "register" a channel to list a group of valid userhosts which would be the ONLY people allowed to hold channel ops on that channel? Yes - 5,305 No - 2,943 3) Should a user be blocked from changing nicks (nick flood) or speaking on a channel (public flood) immediately once they are banned on the channel, even if they are not kicked? Yes - 6,892 No - 1,379 4) Should we provide a service that allows the first person to register a nickname to be the "owner" of that nickname and automatically kill any other user who attempts to use that nickname after warning him and giving him ample time to select a new nickname? Yes - 6,640 No - 1,606 5) Should IRC operators provide a service (or be willing to kill or ban users from IRC) where IRC users who are harassing other users are removed from the network? Yes - 7,204 No - 1,048 6) Should we allow open access to an IRC operator channel at all times and restrict IRC operator status to only those people who are willing to devote their IRC time to helping average users? Yes - 7,448 No - 763 7) Should we adopt a slogan that we are the "Friendly IRC Network"? Yes - 7,688 No - 530 8) Since eff.org is no longer a main server, we need to select a new name for this IRC network once we implement the desired changes. What should it be? UserNet - 3,142 DALnetII - 3,017 DALnet - 2,043 KaehnoNet - 1 9) Should we make you an IRC operator? Yes - 8,211 No - 2 As you can see, the users have spoken out in overwhelming numbers. A clear and lopsided vote like this demands immediate response by us, the IRC operators of this network. Because of this, at noon EST on November 13th, 1996, ircd.texas.net will begin running version 2.8.21.mu3.dal4.2 (DALnet's latest) of ircd. This will make us completely incompatible with the rest of the network, but hey... the users have spoken. We will also have open O-lines because the users have shown that they all want to be IRC operators. I hope that the remainder of you self-centered, cold, uncaring operators will for once listen to what the IRC USERS want and follow ircd.texas.net in this noble endeavor. IRC: Hendrix -=- E-mail: jimi@texas.net -=- Home pages: http://www.lvis.com -=- jimi@lvis.com -=- "Quid rides? Mutato nomine, de te fabula narratur." -- Some old Roman guy